Thread by @Rand_Rajwade

This is my framework for making decisions on whether this person is good/bad, smart/stupid.

I look at comments on value-judgements, or simply put: PEOPLE'S ACTIONS WITH RESPECT TO SOMETHING I VALUE HIGHLY.

For example, let's take a friend case. I consider him smart, well-read, pretty rational and in general a good human being. But for someone like me, for whom reason and rationality is the final aim, it is a great contradiction for me when someone believes in God or mystic power.

I get confused that how someone can be this irrational (belief in anything that has not been created induced or deduced by the scientific method is itrational).

But that doesn't mean out of nowhere I will cut off contact with him, or start disrespecting him.

Why? For me belief in God is a lesser valuable thing than belief in Reason, Capitalism, Hindu Civilization etc. Belief in God is a personal thing.

Hence this approach can be generalized.
1. Checkout the person
2. ⁠Understand what thing he is disagreeing with you on, or what thing of his you do not like
3. ⁠See if that thing is something you value pretty highly

4. ⁠If it is something you value pretty highly, then by all means oppose this person
5. ⁠Else leave it and avoid making binary statements about him.

For example, let's take a researcher. He made big statements without primary proof. But on further inspection we learnt that he had a secondary source atleast.

If someone made a serious mistake about something of high value, there too it can be a mistake, and not a willful error for political pandering. There's a difference between instantial stupidity(stupidity in one place), a stupid person, and an evil person.
This I think is right.

Sources: 1. Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand
2. Nichomachean Ethics by Aristotle

@threadreaderapp unroll